Friday, May 4, 2012


It is bittersweet to say, "I told you so" to those in LA that Barnette was there to privatize. Many said no, resisted the thought. I fought Barnette in King County along side of the ACO Guild there, advising them about "No Kill" and how it operates. I know about this woman. She was part of a plan to privatize by undermining animal control. What is "undermining"? Lying, same difference. 

There are posts upon posts on this blog about this undermining, or "creating instability" as Barnette, Claire Davis, called it. Here is her letter to Dow Constantine, a partner in crime who is now the CAO of the County.
This is a most excellent run down of the misdeeds of Breeder Brenda Barnette. I suggest you read it all.

(Barnette gave away a brand new shelter to Best Fiends) "The adoptions from the Best Friends shelter have been less than stellar … and I think that is because the agreement only allows them to take the 'leftovers' … meaning animals that are not adopted by the public or taken by rescue groups…so that means they are left with a whole lot of pit bulls, Chihuahuas and tabby cats … making it more difficult for rescues to get animals out of the shelter would leave more 'desirable' animals to go to Best Friends and thus improve their adoption numbers to justify a private group taking more responsibility by doing better," a key source tells me.

Some local animal rights activists agree with that appraisal entirely and think that a privatization contract will favor New Hope.  Others think that the second half of the statement only speaks of rescue agencies that aren't performing optimally.

"My feeling is that she is not a very good communicator, and that hinders the progress of any kind of partnership and progress in project management," animal activist and animal education proponent Paul Darrigo told me.  Darrigo spearheads a group that has provided education to Reserve Animal Control Officers (RACOs) whose vision has been to provide LAAS with fifty reserve, fully-empowered Animal Service officials, the way the Sheriff’s Department and the Police Department staff reserve officers.  But unlike earlier General Managers, Barnette has taken administrative actions that diminish the presence of RACOs within the city and many speculate that the only reason to do so is to pave the way for a single private controlling organization.


Anonymous said...

She wants to let puppy mills and dog fighters increase and succeed!

Best Friends looks like they are shooting down the rescue groups. They showed their true colors.

When will rescue groups understand that Best Friends is in it for the cash, not the animals. The rescues are the little people that Best Friends will step on to keep cashing in.

Anonymous said...

I just read on your blog that Barnette was hired to privatize Animal Control. We have known that for some time, going back even to the time before she was hired. All government agencies are looking to privatize services where practical and possible. The pension systems currently offered to union works are unsustainable. Government must reduce the number of workers who are currently employed in government functions.

I anticipate in many areas, Cities and Counties will be reverting back to volunteer Fire Departments, outsourcing any and all functions from fleet services to facility management services to guard services. Over the next few years, we will see a drastic reduction in the number of State, County and City employees which will further keep the economy in a state of decline.

The problem with “privatizing” animal control services is the lower cost basis for obtaining shelter services does not equate to quality care. That is the reason why many shelters cancelled their contracts to provide animal control services when the Hayden Bill was passed. The private shelters could not provide the enhanced level of care with no additional funding. The same will happen if a large municipal system like LA attempts to privatize their shelter system. They will realize short term gains, but this will result in increased expenses when the private agency runs the organization into the ground. This concept in many cases results in being penny wise and dollar foolish. They will save a few pennies today, but it will cost the tax payer dollars tomorrow to un-due the damage.

Anonymous said...

There is NO lower cost for privatizing animal control. Privatizing it has increased the cost and reduced the quality. Privatizing has turned ac shelters into disease warehouses where dogs kill each other in cages and and sick animals go untreated, and yet costs keep spiralling.

Privatizing is the garbage spread by Winograd and Barnette type jackasses who simply want to steal the taxpayers money and torture animals at taxpayer expense, and literally extort funds for their personal financial gain.

Animal control is a public safety job, and unbiased trained people who answer to the public, with police powers, need to do it, not crazy AKC weirdos or hoarder no kill slow killers. Otherwise people and animals die.

AC animals belong to the public, and public servants need to address animal control issues and be responsible to the public. It is not a place for crackpots and animal abusers who try to hide their crimes, and no kill has done over and over again.

Public animal control can forge relationships with private rescue and sheltering that ISN'T corrupt as Best Friends is corrupt, but core animal control must and will remain public servants jobs.

No kill and its failures has made sure of that. No kill has turned animal control into cesspools, plus no kill simply stopped addressing the spay and neuter issues so that overpopulation goes up.

We've already seen what "privatizing" animal control looks like, or its attempt in LA, where Barnette stole someone's dog and took out the microchip to give it to a third party to sell.

(Now imagine Brenda Barnette running a voluinteer fire department. You're kidding, right? Like hiring an arsonist to be fire captain. That's what privatizing fire and police services look like in anything but a low population, rural area and those are disappearing.)

Anonymous said...

Animal control does not need to be privatized by NO KILL dog breeders.

Barnette's rebuttal:

Anonymous said...

Is Winograd writing for ALF now?

Anonymous said...

lol yep, a breeder has obviously infiltrated the alf website - they are even linking to the NAIA. Good grief you can't tell who is who anymore in the animal community.

Anonymous said...

Who runs ALF? Did they pocket a big fat cash donation from Rick Berman via NAIa?

That is who NAIA works with, Rick Berman.

If I had to guess, the people who started it are long gone and some cheat took a cash bribe and sold the website to Rick Berman.